• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Unreal Engine 5 revealed! Real-Time Prototype Gameplay Demo Running On PS5

onQ123

Report me for starting troll threads. Ban warning.
May 1, 2010
15,821
4,036
1,275
I don’t think it will be half the perceivable detail. Depends how good the lossy compression holds up.

So Xbox SX 40MB of raw data per frame will be equal to PS5 90MB of raw data per frame?


So 18% higher sample rate is going to be noticeable but the data being sampled having 129% higher detail isn't going to have perceivable difference? Got You!
 

onQ123

Report me for starting troll threads. Ban warning.
May 1, 2010
15,821
4,036
1,275
No, it's not. Is making the player move by pressing a button artificial intelligence? Your character even knows how to climb a wall, jump or fit into tight places and all you do is hold the analog stick!
You're not artificial pressing a button is human interaction
 

onunnuno

Neo Member
Apr 1, 2020
15
11
100
The ps5 has 16GB of vram. The 2080ti only has 11GB. Maybe if you mean titan. Otherwise it may even not fit in memory whats needed if it uses over 11GB of vram
Don't forget that 2080 Ti has 11GB dedicated, 16GB in PS5 are shared between CPU and GPU.

In the end of the day the 2080Ti will probably have more available RAM to it than the PS5 GPU
 
Nov 5, 2016
21,338
37,556
1,085
One Big Room, Full Of Bad Bitches
So Xbox SX 40MB of raw data per frame will be equal to PS5 90MB of raw data per frame?


So 18% higher sample rate is going to be noticeable but the data being sampled having 129% higher detail isn't going to have perceivable difference? Got You!
Where did he mention the 18 percent sample rate?

And I agree with him. I don't think SSD bandwidth and CPU/GPU power are weighted the same in the overall rendering process. 2x the SSD speed is a big advantage on paper but I don't think it will equal twice the detailed image.
 

onQ123

Report me for starting troll threads. Ban warning.
May 1, 2010
15,821
4,036
1,275
Where did he mention the 18 percent sample rate?

And I agree with him. I don't think SSD bandwidth and CPU/GPU power are weighted the same in the overall rendering process. 2x the SSD speed is a big advantage on paper but I don't think it will equal twice the detailed image.
So you don't think that a SSD that's over 2X as fast will be able to stream in 2X more detailed assets?



I used the GPU difference to get the 18% higher sample rate
 

BrentonB

Neo Member
Mar 25, 2020
46
69
110
Don't forget that 2080 Ti has 11GB dedicated, 16GB in PS5 are shared between CPU and GPU.

In the end of the day the 2080Ti will probably have more available RAM to it than the PS5 GPU
I don't see the PS5 OS requiring twice as much RAM as the XSX, especially since it is totally bespoke and not beholden to Windows. Hopefully we'll find out soon enough.
 

Ascend

Member
Jul 23, 2018
1,586
2,084
385
So you don't think that a SSD that's over 2X as fast will be able to stream in 2X more detailed assets?



I used the GPU difference to get the 18% higher sample rate
"Detail" is a vague term in this context. An SSD that is twice as fast can either stream twice the assets of the same size, or, the same amount of assets that are twice the size. How that translates into visible detail on your monitor is a whole other subject. A bunch of things happen in the middle.
 

onunnuno

Neo Member
Apr 1, 2020
15
11
100
I don't see the PS5 OS requiring twice as much RAM as the XSX, especially since it is totally bespoke and not beholden to Windows. Hopefully we'll find out soon enough.
Me neither, but a game running is not only memory dedicated to GPU assets. While some are shared with the CPU, everything else still lives in the RAM.

For instance the physics system is not "RAM Free" as in just uses data from the models themselves. It uses it's own data that does not exist in a GPU nowadays. That was my point not the OS.
 

OSC

Member
Jun 16, 2018
2,132
1,346
475
Me neither, but a game running is not only memory dedicated to GPU assets. While some are shared with the CPU, everything else still lives in the RAM.

For instance the physics system is not "RAM Free" as in just uses data from the models themselves. It uses it's own data that does not exist in a GPU nowadays. That was my point not the OS.
Likely 3GB or less of cpu related memory use.
 

vpance

Member
Jun 20, 2005
7,780
1,169
1,480
So Xbox SX 40MB of raw data per frame will be equal to PS5 90MB of raw data per frame?


So 18% higher sample rate is going to be noticeable but the data being sampled having 129% higher detail isn't going to have perceivable difference? Got You!
Another thing to consider is what is the starting point of quality for PS5 data and how compressed it already is. If what we saw was compressed to the limit in order to achieve 11-22GB/s then you might assume XSX would have to go very deep into lossy territory and/or noticeably reduce detail to keep up. That’s the worst case.

The UE5 comparos will be really interesting. But it all depends on how much devs will choose to max out on PS5 SSD speeds vs XSX.
 
Last edited:

Can't decide

Member
Sep 11, 2018
397
881
340
I'm just watching this video now and might start trawling through 25 pages of discussion, so call me a blind and blithering fool, but I'm not sure what was supposedly so impressive or impossible about the graphics - and I'm not talking about all the wizardry and number crunching going on in the engine, but how convincing the final rendered output image on the screen looks to our eyes.

We've seen tech demos for some years that are "running and playing in real time" and never see the same quality of results in any fully released games (for obvious reasons). I would rather nexgen focused more on things such as interactive objects/details and not seeing objects clipping than even more flashy graphics though.

The following are also real time demos, but from last gen on last gen engines, that look just as good as this UE5 video on unreleased hardware, so I'll continue to wait until the games are actually released on the consoles.

 

onQ123

Report me for starting troll threads. Ban warning.
May 1, 2010
15,821
4,036
1,275
I'm just watching this video now and might start trawling through 25 pages of discussion, so call me a blind and blithering fool, but I'm not sure what was supposedly so impressive or impossible about the graphics - and I'm not talking about all the wizardry and number crunching going on in the engine, but how convincing the final rendered output image on the screen looks to our eyes.

We've seen tech demos for some years that are "running and playing in real time" and never see the same quality of results in any fully released games (for obvious reasons). I would rather nexgen focused more on things such as interactive objects/details and not seeing objects clipping than even more flashy graphics though.

The following are also real time demos, but from last gen on last gen engines, that look just as good as this UE5 video on unreleased hardware, so I'll continue to wait until the games are actually released on the consoles.


The difference is that these demos focus on one small section at a time while the UE5 demo moved through all these different scene in real-time at a fast pace.

What the engine is allowing is for us to get the level of detail seen in tech demos that focused on small scenes into games now.
 

sinnergy

Member
Jun 16, 2007
3,151
1,119
1,135
Let's do some basic math here...

We know the demo was running mostly at 1440p
We know the demo was running at 30 fps
We know the demo was using raw uncompressed data
We know the demo was having pretty much one triangle per pixel
I'll assume 32-bit colors.
I'll assume RAM doesn't exist.

Based on the above, you have 2560 x 1440, which is 3,686,400 triangles/pixels.
Running at 30 fps means you have 33.3 ms to render a frame.

If you stream everything on the fly, that means you have to process all those 3,686,400 pixels in less than 33.3ms.
32 x 3,686,400 / 8 = 14745600 bytes = 14.7456 MB.

Vertices are a better indication of throughput cost than triangles, but since they are generally almost equal, rounding up should be ok. You would have to output about 15MB of data per frame, multiply by 30 is about 450MB/s. That is what you would need to stream if you were literally sending data from the SSD to the GPU without any processing in the middle. That is too fast to be streamed from an HDD, but very doable from any SSD.

Note that this is output data being used as reference, not input. The input is inevitably higher, but it is unclear how much higher it would be. It all depends on how efficient the reading from the SSD is, i.e. if you're loading full textures and culling them later, or if you're loading primarily what you need and ignoring the rest.
Additionally, this completely ignores reused assets, and assumes that every triangle/pixel is completely unique, which generally is not the case.

Bottom line is, even if the streaming from SSD is 5 times larger, you would still be below 2.4GB/s.
Based on this extremely rough estimate of what would need to be streamed, I doubt the full capacity of the PS5 SSD is being used, and I extremely doubt that the XSX or PC would be incapable.

It's the engine that is the 'hero' here. They've completely changed the way of rendering things.
Yup.
 
  • LOL
Reactions: jonnyp

lukilladog

Member
Feb 6, 2018
1,369
837
405
I'm just watching this video now and might start trawling through 25 pages of discussion, so call me a blind and blithering fool, but I'm not sure what was supposedly so impressive or impossible about the graphics - and I'm not talking about all the wizardry and number crunching going on in the engine, but how convincing the final rendered output image on the screen looks to our eyes.

We've seen tech demos for some years that are "running and playing in real time" and never see the same quality of results in any fully released games (for obvious reasons). I would rather nexgen focused more on things such as interactive objects/details and not seeing objects clipping than even more flashy graphics though.

The following are also real time demos, but from last gen on last gen engines, that look just as good as this UE5 video on unreleased hardware, so I'll continue to wait until the games are actually released on the consoles.

What is impressive is that the technology shown on this demo (hardware and software), will finally allow within games, the kind of detail you see in those other demos you linked to, and then some.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: polybius80 and OSC
Nov 5, 2016
21,338
37,556
1,085
One Big Room, Full Of Bad Bitches
PC Gamer....UE5 demo looks amazing, but shows nothing that will move games forward


Last night in Assassin's Creed Odyssey I scaled a cliff to attack a fort. I'd already used my magic eagle to scout ahead and pick out my target within the castle walls. I plotted a route to my victim, and equipped a long spear to counter the guards wielding short swords.

At no point during this process did I think, 'wow the geometry of this cliff lacks detail'. I didn't question the fidelity of the global lighting. Odyssey is one of many games this generation that have given us huge, extraordinary open worlds to explore.

The Unreal Engine 5 demo is amazing, don't get me wrong. There is a clear leap in fidelity and the dynamic lighting is gorgeous. The demo wasn't a game trailer. Its purpose is to show off the new engine's visual capabilities, but once I'd unpacked the new features I was left wondering what about the tech is actually going to enable developers to create new experiences.
t doesn't help that the demo slavishly emulates features we've come to expect from current gen third-person games like Tomb Raider and Uncharted. It even featured a loading cranny.....In a future where all games will be optimised to run on SSDs, such tricks surely won't be needed.
The demo is a marketing exercise, of course. As such these new features aren't necessarily created with the player in mind, but it goes to show that the most meaningful advances of the next generation will probably be invisible. Games loading from SSDs is a big deal.
 
Last edited:

Can't decide

Member
Sep 11, 2018
397
881
340
The difference is that these demos focus on one small section at a time while the UE5 demo moved through all these different scene in real-time at a fast pace. What the engine is allowing is for us to get the level of detail seen in tech demos that focused on small scenes into games now.
The only thing that you could somewhat call faced paced were the last few seconds of flying, which was smothered in motion blur and still remained in a smallish, narrow environment where you could see that most of the the detail stopped once it reached the portal. They said that the detail stretches all the way into the horizon, but I don't see it, after the halfway mark where the level ends at the portal, the land is barren with repeating models/geometry.

What is impressive is that the technology shown on this demo (hardware and software), will finally allow within games, the kind of detail you see in those other demos you linked to, and then some.
I've heard this and similar for years, some of which never saw the light of day or beyond a game or two.. Like I said, I'll keep my expectations down and wait until finished games actually release that look like these.
 

geordiemp

Member
Sep 5, 2013
7,872
2,687
630
UK
Horizon Zero Dawn tweet said main character has more polygons now than all other characters in HZD1 put together.

It sounds as if HZD2 and decima engine is streaming high quality lots of triangles as well. Sounds familiar...

Lets see Sonys first party versions, I can imagine they have been preparing for a while to blow us away.....again.
 
Last edited:

Monsterkillah

Member
Aug 12, 2018
3,048
4,322
555
I wonder what going on with Crytek and Cry Engine?

They ve gone awfully silent lately

Used to be the leading inovators when it comes to visuals

This should be their perfect moment to shine and wow us with something new

Remember Crysis 3 and Ryse Son of Rome?

Yeah thats amazing but show us something new, you guys are getting eaten up by Epic right now

Step up your game
 

mckmas8808

Member
May 24, 2005
43,448
6,908
1,835
Guys it uses virtual geometry and virtual texturing. All data is stored as pages in a huge database on the SSD, a hierarchical acceleration structure to select which pages of triangle soup and textures to pull in. Hence why they use 8k textures and have "infinite" detail. Only the texels and triangles being drawn are loading into RAM.

You need a good SSD for that to perform well.

This was discussed a long time ago as a target for id Tech 6 by John C (2011?)


Thanks for this.
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Dec 3, 2013
34,952
54,340
1,170
Angry Joe brought up a good point in his video, How are they going to fit all this data on a system uncompressed. Lossless. Call of Duty+Warzone is already nearly 200gb and nowhere near the fidelity or scope of something like this.
The size is also because of duplicated data for mechanical drives. Angry Joe needs to read up on the technical more.

You can remove a lot of duplicate bloat that isn't needed with these SSD setups.
 

Ascend

Member
Jul 23, 2018
1,586
2,084
385
I wonder what going on with Crytek and Cry Engine?

They ve gone awfully silent lately

Used to be the leading inovators when it comes to visuals

This should be their perfect moment to shine and wow us with something new

Remember Crysis 3 and Ryse Son of Rome?

Yeah thats amazing but show us something new, you guys are getting eaten up by Epic right now

Step up your game
Are they? They seem pretty active to me...

This is one year ago;

And they are releasing tutorials to this day. This was released yesterday;
 
Nov 5, 2016
21,338
37,556
1,085
One Big Room, Full Of Bad Bitches
The size is also because of duplicated data for mechanical drives. Angry Joe needs to read up on the technical more.

You can remove a lot of duplicate bloat that isn't needed with these SSD setups.
It sounds like both consoles have tech or processes in place to try and keep install sizes as small as possible, with the incoming 8k textures/assets being pretty hefty ( I assume, correct me if I am wrong though), will it balance out and game sizes will remain mostly the same (larger assets/files, but better tech to simplify installs, back to square one)?
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Dec 3, 2013
34,952
54,340
1,170
It sounds like both consoles have tech or processes in place to try and keep install sizes as small as possible, with the incoming 8k textures/assets being pretty hefty ( I assume, correct me if I am wrong though), will it balance out and game sizes will remain mostly the same (larger assets/files, but better tech to simplify installs, back to square one)?
We shall see. But they are also having piecemeal install setups as well in the SDK.

CoD is a special case, because it duplicates a ton of data. Not every game is that insane 200GB+.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ShadowWolf712

ShadowWolf712

Member
Dec 27, 2019
416
776
275
33
Wisconsin
It sounds like both consoles have tech or processes in place to try and keep install sizes as small as possible, with the incoming 8k textures/assets being pretty hefty ( I assume, correct me if I am wrong though), will it balance out and game sizes will remain mostly the same (larger assets/files, but better tech to simplify installs, back to square one)?
In theory, game sizes in general should stay about the same or even a bit smaller, but I imagine some special cases will still be larger.

That is, with First Party. If Third Party is still making games with mechanical HDDs in mind, odds of them putting in the work to actually optimize for the console SSDs likely still goes down. So it's "wait and see" time.
 

SirTerry-T

Member
Dec 4, 2018
276
418
315
U.K
I think the demo was geared as much, if not more so, to showing the film industry what Unreal brings to the table than it was the games industry to be honest. Film has the luxury of not having to worry about game logic, a.i etc living on top of all those expensive assets being pumped into your graphics engine.
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Dec 3, 2013
34,952
54,340
1,170
I think the demo was geared as much, if not more so, to showing the film industry what Unreal brings to the table than it was the games industry to be honest. Film has the luxury of not having to worry about game logic, a.i etc living on top of all those expensive assets being pumped into your graphics engine.
I believe they use Unreal for The Mandalorian.
 

sinnergy

Member
Jun 16, 2007
3,151
1,119
1,135
I think the demo was geared as much, if not more so, to showing the film industry what Unreal brings to the table than it was the games industry to be honest. Film has the luxury of not having to worry about game logic, a.i etc living on top of all those expensive assets being pumped into your graphics engine.
Epic wants into Hollywood, yes. They are already in The Mandalorian and Rouge One. The Mandalorean, set video is very informative.
 
Last edited:

martino

Member
Apr 25, 2013
3,467
810
610
France
So you don't think that a SSD that's over 2X as fast will be able to stream in 2X more detailed assets?



I used the GPU difference to get the 18% higher sample rate
ps5 gpu will ne be able to display 2 times more asset than xsx even if 9gb/s can allow it.
Did they stop adding details because of the i/o limit or because the framerate and resolution was already low at that level ?
Tim didn't said clearly and unlike usual posters i don't try to read the answer between the lines.
 
Last edited:

onQ123

Report me for starting troll threads. Ban warning.
May 1, 2010
15,821
4,036
1,275
ps5 gpu will ne be able to display 2 times more asset than xsx even if 9gb/s can allow it.
Did they stop adding details because of the i/o limit or because the framerate and resolution was already low at that level ?
Tim didn't said clearly and unlike usual posters i don't try to read the answer between the lines.
What make you think PS5 GPU will need 2X the power to render assets with 2X the detail? right now someone could make a demo for the PS4 & Xbox One with really high details for a small scene as long as the data can fit into the RAM.
 

martino

Member
Apr 25, 2013
3,467
810
610
France
What make you think PS5 GPU will need 2X the power to render assets with 2X the detail? right now someone could make a demo for the PS4 & Xbox One with really high details for a small scene as long as the data can fit into the RAM.
Maybe i was to precise but it usually cost more.
and yes it's not a certainty here.
We lack ANSWERS and DETAILS about the tech and this demo to be sure.
And reading between the lines is not Data, it's confirmation bias (confirming always same things from same people with oppisite reading when opposite bias !)
 
Last edited:

JordanN

Member
Apr 21, 2012
20,798
11,265
1,170
Brampton, Ontario
The ps5 has 16GB of vram. The 2080ti only has 11GB. Maybe if you mean titan. Otherwise it may even not fit in memory whats needed if it uses over 11GB of vram
ps5 has 16GB of vram outside titan most cards have 8 or 11GB of vram.

If you try to load 30+GB into ram expect good loading times
Do you have proof of this?

Even without going into the specifics, my computer has never waited on my memory to do something. That actually sounds like a bottlenecked system (like when you have a really powerful CPU but you pair it with a very weak GPU, it's the GPU that holds back the computer).

But if I wanted to load 20GB of data right now, it never takes more than 1 second (I do this all the time in my modeling packages when i need to test something).
 
Last edited:

OSC

Member
Jun 16, 2018
2,132
1,346
475
Do you have proof of this?

Even without going into the specifics, my computer has never waited on my memory to do something. That actually sounds like a bottlenecked system (like when you have a really powerful CPU but you pair it with a very weak GPU, it's the GPU that holds back the computer).

But if I wanted to load 20GB of data right now, it never takes more than 1 second (I do this all the time in my modeling packages when i need to test something).
on hdd that's 100MB/s, so for 20GB it is 200 seconds. On sata ssd which is 500MB/s that is still 40 seconds. On nvmes which can reach 10x that speed, it should be 4 seconds. But for unknown reasons nvme drives do not load games faster than sata ssds for all practical purposes. So realistically unless there are ways around that 20GB gaming loading will take you 40 seconds even on the fastest nvme.

Also there are rumors that even with heatsinks if the pc nvmes are constantly pushed for hours they start throttling performance and overheat, I don't know if these rumors are true though.

edit:
I'm not sure how you can be loading 20GB in one second considering the fastest nvme drive is 5GB/s theoretical speed.
 
Last edited:

JordanN

Member
Apr 21, 2012
20,798
11,265
1,170
Brampton, Ontario
edit:
I'm not sure how you can be loading 20GB in one second considering the fastest nvme drive is 5GB/s theoretical speed.
That's correct.

I was looking for the biggest file to stream off my M.2 drive but sadly, I only found a 250mb one. So it skewed my results.




I also did another test where I had 20GB in memory but the actual assets being pulled were less than 1 GB as well.

 
Last edited:
  • LOL
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: OSC and jonnyp

E-Cat

Member
Jan 14, 2013
3,847
432
620
meh. this is just a tech demo, not gameplay.

For reference:

this is a similar epic games unreal engine tech demo, but for unreal engine 3:



platform: xbox 360 and ps3

and now compare this demo to real gameplay from PS3/xbox 360 unreal engine games lol
Inaccurate. This "Unreal 3.5" demo was targeting next-gen (aka PS4), also it was targeting 2.5 TFLOPS.